↓ Skip to main content

The Structure and Function of Research Ethics Committees in Africa: A Case Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS Medicine, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
174 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Structure and Function of Research Ethics Committees in Africa: A Case Study
Published in
PLOS Medicine, January 2007
DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nancy E Kass, Adnan Ali Hyder, Ademola Ajuwon, John Appiah-Poku, Nicola Barsdorf, Dya Eldin Elsayed, Mantoa Mokhachane, Bavon Mupenda, Paul Ndebele, Godwin Ndossi, Bornwell Sikateyo, Godfrey Tangwa, Paulina Tindana

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 2 1%
South Africa 2 1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 161 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 17%
Researcher 26 15%
Student > Master 25 14%
Professor 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 49 28%
Unknown 21 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 29%
Social Sciences 29 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 39 22%
Unknown 27 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,622,206
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#3,206
of 5,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,159
of 173,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#31
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,591 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.